The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

More on mandating drug tests for any aspect of government assistance

OK, from my previous postings, you already know I pass an annual drug screen to provide for myself. What taxes can be collected under contract are collected and redistributed when and wherever the government and it's banking system see fit (to sustain porous boarders, provide welfare to drug addicts, give cheap loans and kick backs to corporations that are killing people, provide questionable narratives to fund bogus non-scientific studies to explain catastrophic planned skyscraper demolitions and other failed fema and nist and cfr and extrogovernmental escapades.)
My point: since my drug free dollars are supporting drug addled entitlements let them stop right now until everybody accepting these setasides gets screened annually. An E-mail I got has suggested the new federal drug screens can be called "Urine or your out"!
Oh you take drugs? I don't, so your not my constituency. Kick everyone off the Dole that fails a drug screen since keeping them only fosters denial and law breaking. You just screen them and drop the dirty ones. This is good public policy because it will save billions of budget dollars. Oh yeah, and it's what I want to happen to double standard hypocrites. Ah, your FHA MORTGAGE SHOULD REQUIRE AN ANNUAL DRUG SCREEN. Congressional franking privilages and write-offs on transportation; annual drug screen. Just been awarded a government contract? Here's your cup, annual mandatory pee test for the duration of each contract. Kidney trouble? Blood and hair. Mortgage tax give backs; a drug screen for each year of eligibility. Drop every dirty government client and see who's left standing. Since you took the money, take the urine, tyrants!

Tags: watercooler

2 members like this

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 24, 2011 at 2:32pm: The Supreme Court will have a say in this. What they say will determine what is established as process in these regards.

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 24, 2011 at 2:12pm: My scenario resolves these concerns while putting a wake up call in the Hopper for the junky and the pusher.

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 24, 2011 at 2:05pm: The laws regarding which drugs get screened for are already in place. No one has asked me if i wanted to be screened for this or that. This war on drug policy at present has no context at all except to screen the poor and the working class. This is NOT DEMOCRATIC.

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 24, 2011 at 1:49pm: Hi Jeremy. Actually I try to apply Objectivist ideas to my life. I wouldn't say I qualify as much oc anything beyond what I try to do.
Am I being sarcastic? Very much so. But the point is easier to see this way. Congress has failed to finely craft the law. They are like a junky. Their junk is money. They need another fix. The clean needle program for this junky is to drug screen all their clients. Oh, don't worry! They can still have their drug. But, only by prescription. This entails apportionment.Right now we play the role of doctor. Government is the patient in need of a treatment plan. Fortunately we are not practicing medicine without a licence however. The only credential we need in this instance is our competent citizenship. Drug screens if they exist in a Democratic system can not merely be for the poor or the workers. They must be for all, or none.

Comment by Jeremy Raines on August 24, 2011 at 1:03pm: I know you're an Objectivist, but are you being sarcastic? If not, explain which drugs should we screen for? Do you think all illegal drugs are equal? Shouldn't alcoholics, smokers, and overeaters also been thrown off the bill? Should the children of these people also be taken off government support? Are spouses complicit? Also, do you know if drug dealers take food stamps?

I have many questions because I don't have all the information, and I can't judge people quite so readily. My "spidey-sense" tells me that this is a bad idea on the face of it, just like the drug war itself. No, I don't partake in illegal drugs or state assistance, but I also don't see how this is useful. Perhaps you can enlighten this "bleeding heart liberal" further.